Post Your Comment

59 Comments

Finally. Im tired of Intel dominance. I havent seen seomthing really exciting from AMD like this in a long time. All the AMD stuff for the last three years have looked skimpy at best. But they really have a lot of stuff coming out. Not only that but it really looks like its going to be competitive this time. Late or not its better than nothing. Better than what theyve been coming out with for the past few years anyways (like that original Phenom bs). Happy to see that they are catching up pretty fast.

Im an AMD fan, but I do admit, its true that AMD is really late. I wouldnt go as far as labling this Intel propaganda....

I wonder what will change now that AMD has an extra $1.25 billion in their pockets. All this would have been in development for a long time and so that cash would have had no effect on it. However perhaps they might take a few more risks now that they have a billion of buffer with possibly more rewarding results. Reply

The GPU will be limited by the memory bandwith anyway until they dont come with a on die framebuffer and higher bandwith cpu memory. I think the main advantage will be the + paralel fp compute power if they can take advantage of the openCL or directcompute. Reply

I also want to note that a combined CPU/GPU code that heawyly depend on each other (for example a complex game engine where AI,physics and colision detection would depend on each other and interact) would run several times faster with merged GPU/CPU (with shared higher level caches and same ram pool) than with a stand alone GPU and a CPU(it would crawl on a stand alone gpu and cpu actualy). With GPU comunicating trough pcie buss and with its own memmory the latencies would kill this kind of tasks. Its actualy one of the reasons why nvidias physX just act as a added layer with minimum game code interaction.
The amd-s fusion is actualy a giant leap in this direction (to a real monolithic cpu/gpu). Nvidia doesnt have cpu-s and intel doesnt have a gpu (i doesnt count the GMA series).
There is still one thing thats need to be solved and thats the memory bandwith. With shared memory and the need for the gpu to acts as a real gpu the next generation fusion chips will need ram bandwith
over 100 GB/s (actualy that wouldnt be bad for the cpu part either :)). Reply

Final Words
Unfortunately for AMD, 2010 isn’t really interesting. The company will have to rely on aggressive pricing and the continued success of its graphics teams to carry it for the next 12 - 18 months.

those are your final words? Indeed there are no new architectures popping-up in 2010 but for the rest I think AMD is really focusing on execution which is very important against mighty INTEL. The laptop refresh is really needed for good competition and what about c32/g34 not important enough, it will close the gab quite a bit on the server platform. Perhaps ask Johan if he doesn´t see this as a big thing happening in the server world, it paves the path to next generation of AMD. Reply

Funny, I worked at a semicon company here in Calif. There was this crazy engineer who wouldn't shut up about Zambezi. Every spare moment he would be working on it, swearing that AMD was going to want the specs right away. Everyone would scream "Stop working on Zambezi!" Do something useful.

That is only a bit more than a 4550 (~250M). So what I am hearing is, the next-gen, not-yet-released, coming-in-2-years, the-bees-knees, 32nm APU chip has a GPU is about as fast as the lowest end 55nm card you can find?

Wow, I am so impressed... NOT!

I guess this one is just IGP replacement for fusion platform. And if my guess is right, should take about 150 mm^2. Making the price around 80-150, depending on competing intel stuff.

There is no way they are going to have no L3 cache. With a CPU this small anyway, not having L3 is a disaster. L3 will be small area anyway due to it being denser. I agree, no need for it to be 6M. So I would put the cache range 4-8M. 0M? no way.

What our dear Anand clearly seems to forget mentioning is that the Llano APU is a 1st gen FUSION product, Deneb CPU Cores + ATI GPU Cores and not the crap IGP on die that Sandy Bridge delivers. Do the math and speculation Anand...

Article is crap, get over it. People are going to call out the author when he writes pure drivel like this.

You think that posting an Intel slide FIRST is really the best way to write an AMD based article? You know who does stuff like that? Biased fanboys with an agenda. We expect more, and expect sites to be professional. The article is not, it's a joke.

AMD lost the entire HTPC/Netbook wave. There was a time when AMD had the best IGP on the market by almost 2 gens gap, but that IGP didnt come with a low power CPU for pairing. When atom and netbooks arrived AMP could put a low power CPU for battle and still won the benchs thanks to the amazing IGP and chipset of the platform, but there never was something like an AMD Netbook...

Lets face the truth: we have too much CPU performance already on mobile devices- the last great challenge was BluRay playback, an issue that was solved by better IGPs, not by faster CPUs. But if i go shopping at sub 12 inches Notebooks i cant find anything that gives me the graphics performance of 3 years ago for the price i payed at the time: certainly i have dual-core 45nm CPUs to choose from, but the IGPs are a joke.

The great issue with mobile CPUs are drivers , not raw power requirements: most 45nm C2Ds can do sub 1.0v but the deep C state management of windows are crap, thanks to poor CPU driver investments Reply

Anandtechs position as a leading tech /enthusiast review site took a nose dive today when they plastered an Intel Slide right at the top of the AMD roadmap "article". Several Tomshardware readers were shocked as they finally felt right at home on this once highly respected site . . Reply

Most his pieces are either boring or full of rehashed stuff - I often wish he would stick to counting the beans and just leave the fuck this site alone, to people who know how to write etc.
This piece perfectly illustrates how much he has to do with writing or journalism or news - nothing. Reply

Seriously AMD's road map for 2010 is about as boring as it gets. Some users will appreciate the 6-core CPUs. However, per-core performance will probably be lower than current Quads because of lower clock speeds and lower cache to core ratios. AMD will be forced to compete in the $150 segment and below for all of next year - and do so using chips that are as big and complex as the $999 i7's...

AMD really needs a new micro-architecture. Very high clock speeds, larger caches etc. have made the K10 architecture reasonably competitive with Core 2. However this isn't 2006, this is the end of 2009... Reply

AMD's mobile roadmap (even if they stick to it) is very disappointing; it looks like Intel will barely even have to try to stay on top. Sure AMD's IGPs will be better, but real performance will still come from discrete GPUs. All Intel has to do is make a "good enough" IGP with very low power consumption, enable seamlessly switchable discrete graphics, and boom - AMD's mobile offerings are relegated to the extreme low end for another few years.

As laptops continue to supplant desktops, it looks like AMD will be surrendering even more of the consumer market and mindshare to Intel in the coming years. Reply

I want to hear more about this: "A major focus is going to be improving on one of AMD’s biggest weaknesses today: heavily threaded performance. Intel addresses it with Hyper Threading, AMD is throwing a bit more hardware at the problem. The dual integer clusters you may have heard of are the route AMD is taking..." Reply

AMD is lucky Intel totally flops on IGPs... else they'd be out of business by now due to their inability to compete.

On the other hand, 785/790 chipsets really turned AMD around. Excellent IGP for people who don't do too much gaming (however would like to be able to play some occasional light gaming or favorite older games).

for my next upgrade, I would still go with AMD or NV?? if Intel continues to flop on IGPs. However, if they somehow get a comparable igp, i would switch in no time.
Reply

You are short sighted. Development takes time. What I look for is ...well, development. Development of something new. Innovation. And that's what I'm seeing at AMD. No, they aren't as big as Intel. And you know, if I was the Intel CEO, I would make sure AMD kept going because I would know that Intel vs AMD makes for a better and more interesting Intel. In fact, you should think of Intel and AMD as working together because in fact they are, if you look at it the way I am. AMD just needs to keep trying. Reply

It's about time they're getting more serious about developing better notebook processors instead of just throwing in athlon's an old turion's just to say they're a part of the show. My Lenovo T400 easily gets 4 hours off it's battery when I'm using it for web browsing and whatnot whereas my friend's laptop barely gives him 2.5 hours from doing the same. Reply

First - i'm no fanboy of either of the companies - Its good that both companies exists for consumer prices!

Please give me a break, never seen such biased article anywhere. Even the first picture in an article about AMD starts with an intel product, what a joke post really. Didn't see that the date was the 1st of april.... Reply

While the inclusion of the Sandy Bridge image was simply a tie-in to the text below it, something I always do, it's not my intent to shift the focus of discussion here off of AMD's roadmap and onto a trivial image. I've removed the image so hopefully we can all get back to a good, meaningful discussion here :)

I've also updated the article with a link to the AMD Bulldozer/Bobcat disclosures.

I think that it is a shame that you altered your article as the result of a few comments from over-sensitive people in a comments section that many people reading the main article will never read anyway. Reply

Agreed. More information = better. Giving a detailed look at the competition first for a back-of-mind comparison is a good thing. These readers must be a bit slow if they can't look past the first page. Reply

Agreed. More information = better. Giving a detailed look at the competition first for a back-of-mind comparison is a good thing. These readers must be a bit slow if they can't look past the first page. Reply

Oh, and anand . . .removing a post by someone because you do not agree with what they have said, despite whatever they say about you is not professional behavior.

I also did not agree with what he said, but he has the right to voice his opinion too, no matter how misguided. Best to just ignore such people. You know, like how you ignore me, when I am being (overly?)critical . . . Reply

Jeeez, get over yourself guy.
I understand that this was a roadmap overview type story, but it still seems appropriate to balance that with the real question of whether all this even matters when Intel will be 1 to 2 years ahead. I'm sorry you don't like the facts, but this is AT. Perhaps you should try some religion to protect you from reality instead of reading AT for the next couple years until Intel lets AMD catch up. Reply

I didn't remove anyone's post :) I believe that's our new Report Post feature working as it's intended :) If a certain number of readers submit reports on a particular post the post is automatically hidden. We implemented that after the silliness that happened with some of the reviews earlier this fall.

I have no problems with people voicing their opinion, it only becomes a problem if we end up with the majority of comments in an article thread being dominated by someone not contributing anything to the discussion.

The new site will help fix a lot of this with post rating and auto hiding, we just needed a stopgap measure until then since we've had issues with a few folks.

Anand . . . perhaps the AMD 2010 priority slide is the one you should have led off with.

If you want a bit of free advice . . . when it comes to roadmaps, or non comparison type reviews. I think it would be best if you just stuck to one item at a time. The reason why should be obvious. We, your readers do not give a rats behind what Intel is doing, when we are reading about an AMD thing. Write an Intel thing later if you must, but leave it out of the AMD article.

Now, I myself like Intel, and AMD in equal measure. So, there is no bias in my case. Well, I take that back. I am biased. I am biased towards the parts/technology that suite me the best in a given time frame.

I for one have in the past given you guys a hard time about being biases towards one company or another. But for the most part, I was just giving a tough time. This time, you surely did it to yourself, and if you did not know what you did was wrong here, you should have. Reply

Honestly, I did it simply to give readers background. Not everyone keeps up on codenames, I figured the image would augment the text. I didn't have an issue with it being up until it started to derail the discussion thread in the comments. I want this comment section to be useful, it ceases to be that if the discussion isn't on topic.

Personally I don't believe you can read about one company (AMD or Intel) without referencing the other where it makes sense. Ignoring Sandy Bridge and Intel's roadmap while talking about AMD's roadmap for the next two years seems to leave out a major part of the story.

I appreciate the feedback though, I'll keep image order in mind for next time :)

I personally do not keep up on code names, and to be perfectly honest. I do not care about either AMD's, or Intels roadmaps. Why ? Its not here and now, and things often change, or are just a serious let down by the time they arrive.

Now, with the above said, I still enjoy reading about technology. But if I am reading about say AMD, I do not want the name "Intel" interjected 50 times. I just want the scoop on AMD, and their current technology. If you want to voice your opinion, fine, do it at the end of the article, or in a separate article all together. I can make my own judgement calls.

With all of the above said. You guys at Anandtech do get to talk to the different companies about the various technologies that you write about. This also means that you're more than likely better informed than the rest of us technology Joe's. So I would like to hear your thought absolutely. But not at the expense of another topic. Isolation; keep it separate. Reply

If you don't care about roadmaps why even click the link to read the article? I didn't bother reading the rest of your comment.

I for one care about both. Its interesting to see what tech is supposed to be coming to us. I keep an ear out for specific CPUs, so I know what to compare in the future should I do a build.

I don't know why everyone is whining about the article. Its for our benefit. Free information is free information. I really don't get why people are complaining about the order of pictures and whatnot. Everything said in the article was factual, or stated as opinion. IMO Anand, you did a great job. Reply

On AnandTech, this is part of the tradition.
Check the past... you will find many more samples of this kind of behaviour: Title reads "The new Phenom II", the first page shows us the prices and performance of Intel's CPUs - a jorb well done! Reply

Bitch and moan all you want, but the slide illustrates an important point. AMD is making a big show of announcing the integration of their GPU and CPU, but Intel is already doing that a full year ahead of AMD. The article says as much: " And we'll see it in 2011. Unfortunately that's a bit late." More to the point, there isn't a lot of interest happening from AMD for most of 2010. Sorry I don't have my head up my ass in the sand, but complaining that Anand is telling the truth is childish at best. Take off your AMD fanboi hats and RTFA! Reply

Just STFU already - since you are obviously unable to grasp even the basics of writing any *ARTICLE* (e.g. slides does not illustrate shit here contrary to your lame beliefs), just stop talking about shutting up and remain silent yourself, would'ya? Reply

Intel are AMD's major competition (apart from AMD themselves). The AMD roadmap once again shows AMD being late in comparison to Intel. This is relevant because it will affect uptake of AMD tech. How does this show bias? It's the freaking truth. If brand loyalty alone were enough to generate sales, AMD would not have been introuble in the first place. The fact is that most consumers will go with what comes first and also look for slight performance advantages, even if the advantage is small.

Your whinging about the mention of upcoming Intel tech in this article shows desperation.
Reply